Israel Launches New Northern West Bank Operation: Strategic Shift or Escalation? 

On November 26, 2025, the Israeli military launched a new counterterrorism operation in the northern West Bank, targeting villages like Tubas and Far’a, which it considers militant strongholds for groups such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad. This operation, supported by ground troops and helicopter gunships, represents a strategic continuation of Israel’s intensified security campaign in the region, following the larger-scale “Operation Iron Wall” that began in January 2025 and led to the mass displacement of Palestinians and widespread destruction.

The new incursion underscores the persistent challenge of militant regrouping despite previous operations and occurs within a complex backdrop of escalating violence, significant humanitarian costs, and international condemnation, highlighting the ongoing cycle of military action and resistance without a clear political resolution in sight.

Israel Launches New Northern West Bank Operation: Strategic Shift or Escalation? 

Introduction 

On November 26, 2025, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) initiated a new “broad counterterrorism operation” in the northern West Bank, marking the latest development in a region experiencing escalating violence since the 2023 Gaza war began . This operation comes precisely ten months after Israel launched “Operation Iron Wall,” a massive incursion that forcibly displaced tens of thousands of Palestinians from West Bank refugee camps and established unprecedented Israeli military control over these areas . The new military campaign targets a familiar cluster of villages long associated with terrorist activity—Tubas, Tammun, Far’a, Tayasir, and al-Aqaba—and involves troops from the Commando Brigade, regional brigades, and Border Police, with reports of helicopter gunships supporting ground forces . 

This article examines the strategic calculations behind this new operation, analyzes its potential consequences against the backdrop of Iron Wall’s controversial legacy, and explores what it reveals about Israel’s evolving security approach in the occupied West Bank amid ongoing regional tensions. 

The New Operation: Scope and Immediate Context 

The November 26 operation represents a continued focus on what the IDF perceives as terrorist strongholds in the northern West Bank. According to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, the operation involves “troops from the Commando Brigade and the Samaria and Menashe regional brigades, along with ‘Magav’ Border Police officers” . Palestinian media reported helicopter gunships accompanying troops, suggesting a significant force deployment. The Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) organization swiftly condemned the mission, labeling it “systematic aggression” against Palestinians in the northern West Bank . 

This operation follows two significant counterterrorism actions in the preceding days. Just one day before the operation began, the IDF eliminated Sultan al-Ghani, a Palestinian terrorist responsible for murdering Israeli security guard Gidon Peri in 2024. PIJ claimed al-Ghani as a member. Another day earlier, Israeli security forces eliminated Ala Raouf Shetiyya, who carried out a car-ramming attack near Nablus on May 29, 2024, killing two IDF soldiers . This timing suggests the operation may be, in part, a response to these specific security incidents while also representing a broader strategic initiative. 

Comparison of Recent Israeli West Bank Operations 

The Strategic Backdrop: Why Northern West Bank? 

The northern West Bank, particularly the corridor of villages now drawing IDF attention, has long been associated with terrorist activity. Joe Truzman, a senior research analyst at FDD’s Long War Journal, notes that “Tubas and Far’a functioned as operational hubs for Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad during the pre-October 7 escalation of violence in the West Bank” . This persistent threat environment has made the region a recurring focus for Israeli counterterrorism efforts. 

The reemergence of terrorist activity in this specific area underscores a challenging reality for Israeli security forces: despite extensive previous operations, armed factions can quickly regroup and reconstitute networks . This operational challenge mirrors Israel’s experience in Gaza, where militant infrastructure has repeatedly reemerged after military campaigns. 

Aaron Goren, a research analyst at FDD, observes that “in the two years since Hamas’s October 7 atrocities, the IDF has carried out multiday, targeted operations in the West Bank in order to stymie the possibility of the front escalating to full-scale warfare like in Gaza” . This new operation appears to continue this strategy of conducting targeted, intensive operations rather than allowing conditions to deteriorate into full-scale conflict. 

Operation Iron Wall: The Precedent 

The newly announced operation cannot be understood without examining “Operation Iron Wall,” launched on January 21, 2025 . This earlier operation marked a strategically distinct and more aggressive approach against West Bank militancy compared to previous Israeli operations . Iron Wall initially targeted the Jenin Brigades but expanded within days to Tulkarm and other Palestinian cities and towns. 

Iron Wall was notable for its scale and impact. Human Rights Watch documented that Israeli authorities “forcibly removed 32,000 Palestinians from their homes in West Bank refugee camps without regard to international legal protections and have not permitted them to return” . The organization analyzed satellite imagery and found that six months later, more than 850 homes and other buildings had been destroyed or heavily damaged across three camps . 

A UN preliminary assessment found even greater damage, with 1,460 buildings sustaining damage in the three camps, including 652 that showed signs of moderate damage . The operation also marked the first time the Palestinian Authority directly participated in an Israeli military operation, representing a significant shift in the complex relationship between Israeli and Palestinian security forces . 

The Israeli government justified Iron Wall as necessary to address security threats posed by the camps and “the growing presence of terrorist elements within them” . However, Human Rights Watch found that Israeli authorities “made no evident attempt to establish that their only feasible option was the complete expulsion of the civilian population to achieve their military objective or why they have prohibited residents from returning” . 

The Human Cost and Legal Challenges 

The human rights impact of Israeli operations in the West Bank has been substantial. According to the UN Human Rights Office in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, at least 1,001 Palestinians had been killed by Israeli security forces and settlers in the West Bank from October 7, 2023, through mid-October 2025 . Tragically, one in five of these victims was a child, including 206 boys and 7 girls . 

The UN documentation “attributes this staggering number of killings of Palestinians to the ISF’s systematic use of lethal force against Palestinians in the vast majority of cases, including live fire, airstrikes, and shoulder-fired missiles, in an unlawful, unnecessary, and disproportionate manner, with evident disregard for Palestinians’ right to life, including children” . 

International humanitarian organizations have raised serious legal concerns about these operations. Human Rights Watch has characterized Israel’s forced displacement of Palestinians from West Bank refugee camps as potentially constituting “war crimes and crimes against humanity” . The Geneva Conventions prohibit displacement of civilians from occupied territory except temporarily for imperative military reasons or for the population’s security, and displaced civilians are entitled to protection, accommodation, and to return as soon as hostilities in the vicinity cease . 

The UN Human Rights Office has documented specific concerning patterns in these operations: “among 640 Palestinians killed with live ammunition by ISF, at least in 55 percent (or 355) were shot in the head or other upper part of the body. In at least 244 of the cases, ISF delayed or obstructed medical assistance to those injured” . These patterns suggest systematic approaches rather than isolated incidents. 

Regional Implications and International Response 

The escalating violence in the West Bank occurs within a broader regional context. The Palestinian Islamic Jihad has been attempting to entrench its presence in Syria, with forces concentrated in Palestinian refugee camps in the Damascus region . This suggests that regional militant organizations are adapting to changing conditions and potentially creating new operational bases. 

The international community has responded with varying approaches. The UK government, for instance, has imposed sanctions on two Israeli ministers, Ben Gvir and Smotrich, for their “repeated incitement of violence against Palestinian civilians” . The US, meanwhile, “condemned” this decision on sanctions, revealing divisions in the international response to Israeli policies in the West Bank . 

In September 2025, the UK government recognized the state of Palestine with provisional borders covering lands occupied by Israel in the 1967 conflict, though final borders remain subject to agreement and equal land swaps between Palestinians and Israelis . This move reflects growing international frustration with the ongoing expansion of settlements and violence in the West Bank. 

The October 2025 ceasefire agreement in Gaza has not brought calm to the West Bank, indicating that the dynamics in these two Palestinian territories are operating on somewhat separate tracks, despite being interconnected. The new operation suggests that Israel is continuing its security operations in the West Bank regardless of the status of arrangements in Gaza. 

Conclusion: An Uncertain Path Forward 

The new Israeli operation in the northern West Bank represents both continuity and change in Israel’s approach to security challenges in the occupied territory. It continues the pattern of targeted, intensive operations aimed at preventing the northern West Bank from becoming what one analyst called “a second Gaza” in terms of security threat level. However, it also appears to be more limited in scope and duration than Operation Iron Wall, potentially reflecting lessons learned from that extensive campaign. 

The ongoing violence underscores the intractable nature of the conflict and the limitations of military solutions alone. As Joe Truzman observed, “The reemergence of terrorist activity in this specific area underscores how quickly armed factions can regroup and reconstitute networks in locations where the IDF has conducted extensive counterterrorism operations” . This reality suggests that without complementary political and diplomatic initiatives, military operations may produce temporary security gains but are unlikely to create lasting stability. 

The human cost of these operations continues to mount, with thousands displaced and hundreds killed, including numerous children. The international community remains divided on how to respond effectively, with some states imposing sanctions while others maintain more supportive approaches toward Israel. As the situation evolves, the fundamental tension between Israeli security concerns and Palestinian rights and aspirations appears to be intensifying rather than moving toward resolution. The new operation in the northern West Bank represents another chapter in this prolonged conflict, one whose ultimate impact will only become clear in the coming months and years.